^{page 58 note 1} So T. A. Lacey ap. Hastings, Encycl. Rel. Eth. 10. 904, and others. Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers² II. i., p. 50, leaves the question open.

^{page 58 note 2} So Batiffol, L' Église naissante et le Catholicisme⁵, p. 28₂.

^{page 58 note 3} This appears in Tertullian, Martyr. 3, a fact of particular interest if we recall that in Tertullian the term sacramentum is crystallising (cf. Tixeront, J., Histoire des Dogmes⁸ I., p. 428).Google Scholar

^{page 58 note 4} As Petronius, Sat. 117.

^{page 58 note 5} Cod. Justin. IX. 8. 5.

^{page 58 note 6} Cf. G. Mead ap. Smith-Cheetham, , Dict. Christ. Ant. II., p. 1416Google Scholar: W. E. Beet ap. Hastings, E.R.E. 9, p. 434.

^{page 58 note 7} Cf. Thuc. 8. 54; Aristot. Pol. 1310a 7-; and Ziebarth, Das griechische Vereinswesen, p. 94.

^{page 58 note 8} I.G. II.¹ 609.

^{page 58 note 9} Dittenberger, O.G.I. 573. 23; Ziebarth, op. cit., p. 142. (He there discusses two more questionable examples.) Livy XXXIX- 8. 3 speaks of clandestinae coniurationes in connexion with the Bacchanalia (cf. ibid. 14. 8; 17. 6, and the S.C. de Bacchanalibus, 1. 13).

^{page 58 note 10} As Dittenberger, Sylloge³ 736.

^{page 58 note 11} Wiener Denkschriften LVII. i, p. 18, n. 18, Abb. 10, reprinted in Dittenberger³ 985, and in Sitzungsber. Heidelberg, 1919, XVI., p. 4-.

^{page 58 note 12} Cf. on the deities Weinreich's observations, and on combinations of deities in oaths Cook, A. B., Zeus II., p. 728Google Scholar- (which I quote from proof by the author's kindness).

^{page 59 note 1} So the editors rightly infer from παρθενoν (1. 28).

^{page 59 note 2} (1. 40). For ρν cf. Hom. H. ad Demet. 480 (Eleusinian) with Allen and Sikes ad loc.

^{page 59 note 3} His opinion is quoted in Dittenberger.

^{page 59 note 4} Cf. p. 59 of Weinreich's paper for a detailed comparison.

^{page 59 note 5} The Philadelphian oath was, of course, to be taken once only. For the Christian use pagan practices cf. the judicious discussions of Delahaye, H., Les Légendes hagiographiques², p. 168–Google Scholar; and Geffcken, J., Der Ausgang des griechisch-römischen Heidentums, p. 224–.Google Scholar

^{page 59 note 6} Dittenberger 983. 3-: cf. Porphyry, de abst. II. 17, and Fehrle, E., Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten VI., p. 50.Google Scholar

^{page 59 note 7} Roussel, , Mélanges Homolle (1913), p. 276, 1. 14.Google Scholar

^{page 59 note 8} Cf. Lactantius, Diuin. instit. V. 14, ‘nemo apud eum (sc. deum) seruus est, nemo dominus.’ For the older exclusions cf. Wächter, R.G. V. V. IX. i., p. 123- (slaves), p. 118- (foreigners).

^{page 59 note 9} ap. Stob. flor. 6. 23 (III., p. 286-, Hense); cf. his condemnation of abortion, id. 75. 15 (p. 601, Hense), in marked contrast with Plato, Rep. 461c, Theaet. 149D, Aristot. Pol. 1335b 23, and in accordance with the Hippocratic Oath.

^{page 59 note 10} Carmina latina epigraphica, ed. Bücheler 25₄. cuncti was regarded by the ancients as equivalent to coniuncti (Seru. ad Aen. I. 518; cf. Thesaurus 1. L. IV. 1396, 1400). Petronius' parody of the Senecan teaching that slaves are our brothers (Sat. 71: cf. B. W. Henderson, The Principate of Nero, p. 93) bears witness to its dissemination. On the spread of ethical ideas cf. further Deissmann, A., Licht vom Osten⁴, p. 262–Google Scholar; O. Kern, P. IV. X. 1434. Sarapis and Isis protect all who , says aDelian inscription of the second century B.C. (Weinreich, , Neue Urkunden zur Sarapisreligion, p. 31, 1. 33).Google Scholar